Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 2 Feb 2006 11:14:41 +0100 | From | Matthias Andree <> | Subject | Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) |
| |
Joerg Schilling schrieb am 2006-02-02:
> Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote: > > > It's shorter than /dev/c0t0d0s0? Well, I think it's because people think > > in terms of connectors (my drive is IDE therefore it must be hdc) rather > > than protocol (my drive does ATAPI therefore it must be > > /dev/scsi/c0t0d0s0). > > Is there any reason why the people with small PCs should dominate the > people with big machines?
No side should dominate.
> If you use /dev/hd*, you loose control after you add more than ~ 6-10 disks.
I don't see how a letter such as /dev/hdo /dev/hdp /dev/hdq is much different than an opaque number tuple as 1,15,0 1,16,0 1,17,0... either is a string with systematic generation, and that's about it.
I'm still wondering why mtst (mid-layer access to control tape drives) is happy with /dev/nst0 nst1 ... (device name) and cdrecord (or its author) isn't. cdrecord or libscg should be agnostic of these schemas and take any opaque string that works properly for the given system without complaining. It can invent any numbering scheme it likes, but requesting that the kernel does it if it has no further use for it is barking up the wrong tree.
-- Matthias Andree - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |